Screening may facilitate minimal invasive treatment and can be performed with a relatively low rate of false-positive screen results compared with previous studies on lung cancer screening.

Background The effects of low-dose CT screening on disease stage shift, mortality and overdiagnosis are unclear. Lung cancer findings and mortality rates are reported at the end of screening in the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial. Methods 4104 men and women, healthy heavy smokers/former smokers were randomised to five annual low-dose CT screenings or no screening. Two experienced chest radiologists read all CT scans and registered the location, size and morphology of nodules. Nodules between 5 and 15 mm without benign characteristics were rescanned after 3 months. Growing nodules (>25% volume increase and/or volume doubling time<400 days) and nodules >15 mm were referred for diagnostic workup. In the control group, lung cancers were diagnosed and treated outside the study by the usual clinical practice. Results Participation rates were high in both groups (screening: 95.5%; control: 93.0%; p<0.001). Lung cancer detection rate was 0.83% at baseline and mean annual detection rate was 0.67% at incidence rounds (p¼0.535). More lung cancers were diagnosed in the screening group (69 vs 24, p<0.001), and more were low stage (48 vs 21 stage IeIIB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and limited stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC), p¼0.002), whereas frequencies of high-stage lung cancer were the same (21 vs 16

Due to the international nature of many clinical studies and trials it is often necessary to produce several language versions of specific measures. While it is generally acknowledged that it is necessary to produce versions that are conceptually equivalent, the best method of achieving this is more controversial. It is commonly stated that there is a gold-standard method, which involves forward and backward translation. However, no evidence has been presented to support this view. This paper argues that the "gold-standard" method is difficult to support and describes an alternative method involving dual translation panels that has been used in the production of all adaptations of needs-based quality of life instruments.

Background: The effect of low-dose CT screening for lung cancer on smoking habits has not been reported in large randomised controlled trials. Methods: This study evaluated the effect on smoking habits of screening with low-dose CT at 1-year follow up in the Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial (DLCST), a 5-year randomised controlled trial comprising 4104 subjects; 2052 subjects received annual low-dose CT scan (CT group) and 2052 received no intervention (control group). Participants were healthy current and former smokers (.4 weeks since smoking cessation) with a tobacco consumption of .20 pack years. Smoking habits were determined at baseline and at annual screening. Smoking status was verified using exhaled carbon monoxide levels. Lung function tests, nicotine dependency and motivation to quit smoking were assessed. Quit rates and relapse rates were determined at 1-year follow-up for all subjects. Results: At 1 year the quit rates among smokers were 11.9% in the CT group and 11.8% in the control group (p = 0.95). Relapse rates for former smokers were 10.0% and 10.5% in the CT and control groups, respectively (p = 0.81). Significant predictors (p,0.05) for smoking cessation were: high motivation to quit, low dependency, low ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 s to forced vital capacity, low pack years, higher age, longer period of abstinence and CT findings necessitating 3-month repeat CT scans. Conclusions: Overall, quit rates were similar in the CT and control group at 1-year follow-up, with a net quit rate of 6.0%. Quit rates were higher and relapse rate lower among subjects with initial CT findings that necessitated a repeat scan 3 months later.Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of lung cancer, accounting for over 90% of all lung cancers.

In conclusion, the reliability and the dimensionality of a condition-specific measure with high content validity for persons having abnormal or false-positive lung cancer screening results have been demonstrated. This new questionnaire called Consequences of Screening in Lung Cancer (COS-LC) covers in two parts the psychosocial experience in lung cancer screening. Part I: "anxiety,""behavior,""dejection,""sleep,""self-blame,""focus on airway symptoms,""stigmatization,""introvert," and "harm of smoking." Part II: "calm/relax,""social network,""existential values,""impulsivity,""empathy," and "regretful of still smoking."